Our topical highlight for the week was a guest post from Rishabh Anjay Mohnot, who covered the recent decision of the Madreas HC in Mannivanan v. IPAB & Ors. on this blog. The Madras HC dismissed a writ petition filed against the dismissal of the petitioner’s patent revocation application by the IPAB. Rishabh notes that the Madras HC, while arguably coming to the correct conclusion in the case, failed to consider important aspects of a revocation claim, including the impact…

The thematic highlight for this fortnight was Prashant’s post in response to a recent article by Professor Lawrence Liang on the DU Photocopy Case, almost one year since it was decreed. Prashant, who has previously critiqued the judgment in some incisive pieces on this blog, challenges certain premises on which the article celebrates the Delhi High Court’s judgment, including jurisprudence on whether copyright is a statutory or a natural right, as well as the history and effect of the Stockholm Convention Protocol Regarding Developing Countries. One year after…

This week started with Prashant’s post about the numerous judgements of the Delhi High Court which have continued to apply the overruled judgement in Time Incorporated v. Lokesh Srivastava, relating to the grant of punitive damages in IPR cases. The cases show a disturbing misstep in the court’s refusing to follow the rule of stare decisis on the binding nature of the judgements of larger benches of the court. The next post was Harshvardhan’s exposition on trademark bullying, in the context of the dispute between eBay…